OLED evolution: Comparing the Samsung Galaxy S1, 2, and 3 displays

Share This article

We’ve discussed organic light-emitting diode (OLED) displays at several points in the past year, including why display manufacturers view them as a sort of Holy Grail — and why OLED televisions have taken so many years to bring to market. What we haven’t been able to discuss to any specific degree is how much cellphone OLED displays have advanced in recent years. Dr. Raymond Soneira of DisplayMate Technologies has published a three-way comparison between the Galaxy S (debuted June, 2010), the S2 (September, 2011) and the just-launched Galaxy S3.

Dr. Soneira presents data on how the displays compare against each other, with a hardware-calibrated IPS LCD for reference. A great deal of the information is technical, but there’s some strong takeaways that are more readily accessible. Chief among them is the fact that Samsung’s OLED displays have improved significantly in just two years. The original Galaxy S had a screen area of 7.1 square inches, an 800×480 resolution, and drew a maximum of 2.4W. The S3, by contrast, has a 9.8-square-inch display (38% larger than the S1), and draws a maximum of 1.3W. The S3’s OLED display’s relative power efficiency is a full 92% better than the S1 — a huge leap forward in just a few years.

The S3 improves on its predecessors in most areas, but some of the characteristic problems of the Galaxy S family are still present. If you aren’t fond of over-saturated color (especially green), this probably still isn’t the phone for you. The phone’s color “temperature” is still too high — at 7,860 degrees Kelvin it’s an improvement over the S1’s 10,177K, but pure white is still distinctly blueish. The phone’s gamma level is still well above the standard 2.2, but contrast is much less irregular than with the S1.

The color gamut of the Samsung S1, S2, and S3 displays. As you can see, the displays have a gamut that's larger than standard (the black triangle), resulting in gaudy, over-saturated images. For more info on color gamut, visit DisplayMate.

The one place where the S3 performs significantly worse than its predecessors is its reflectiveness. DisplayMate measures two forms of reflection, “Average Screen Reflection” (how the screen reflects light from all directions) and “Mirror Reflections” (how clearly you can see yourself when looking at the screen). The latter is far more disruptive than the former; DisplayMate writes that mirror reflections are “much more distracting and cause more eye strain. 10 – 15 percent reflections can make the screen much harder to read even in moderate ambient light levels, requiring ever higher brightness settings that waste precious battery power.”

The S3’s mirror reflection rate is 7.1%, compared to 4.7% for the S2 and 4.1% for the original S.

Inching along

All of the usual caveats of OLEDs still apply — blue dies much more quickly, power consumption is still a work in progress, different screen backgrounds draw very different levels of power, and no, you won’t be able to buy one in a TV anytime soon. LG and Samsung are still planning to introduce 55-inch sets this year, but only in limited numbers and at ~$9000. Amazon has 55-inch LCD TVs starting at $749 new, and while they won’t offer much in the way of features, they also won’t require you to dip into Junior’s college fund.

DisplayMate’s full article and measurements are worth a read. The text is a bit… crunchy, but the data is good. If you’ve been looking for a real comparison between the three devices, this should tell you everything you want to know.

The picture at the top isn’t OLED, you are right — and yes, it is mislabeled. Joel will be taken out the back and shot for this misdemeanor.

Maventwo

Samsung Mobile Display have recently also started to manufacture flexible Amoleds on polyamide substrate and probably amorf polyamide because amorf polyamide have higher glass temperature than crystalline polyamide.

With glass temperature means that a material as plastics have a temperature where the material gets soft and halfway to melting.
Amorf materials have usually higher glass temperature than crystalline because of that amorf materials have its crystalls more chaos like in structure than in crystal materials, something you can read on wikipedia.

Amorf materials is often also transparent so for flexible Amoled displays amorf polyamide as substrate have at least two very interesting properties.
1.Higher glass temperature.
2.Amorf polyamide is by it self transparent.

Amorf polyamide as substrate for flexible Amoled displays is of course interesting property
because it make it paossible to make partially or totally transprent Amoled displays when no current is on subpixels or pixels.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2015 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.